Right Angle began as a column in the now-defunct Sunday magazine in November 1991. The column allowed me the luxury of presenting an alternative to the prevailing left-liberal consensus in India. It has become the implicit signature tune for all my subsequent writings.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

NANDAN HAS AADHAAR, BUT CONG POLL PLANK DOESN’T

By Swapan Dasgupta

It is really not surprising that Aadhar cards have
become a talking point in the election campaign of Bangalore South from where
Nandan Nilekani, the former chairman of the UIDAI is contesting as a Congress
candidate. Although Nilekani is otherwise very careful to focus exclusively on
local issues and not allow the focus to shift to the fact that voters are not
electing a local MP to fix their water and garbage problems but contributing to
the formation of a government at the Centre, he has deviated from the script on
the Aadhar card issue. He has flaunted the enrolment of 60 crore people in the
Aadhar schema as a colossal achievement and made it a part of his “problem
solving” credentials.

Nilekani has every right to flaunt his credentials
as the architect of the famed “One Indian, one identity” scheme which the
Congress counts among its significant achievements. However, in the light of a
Supreme Court reaffirming that Aadhar cards are not mandatory for citizens to
benefit from the government’s welfare schemes, it becomes necessary to ask
whether a programme that involved a colossal amount of taxpayers’ money—the
estimates vary wildly from the stated government estimate of Rs 37,182 crore
for the entire project to other estimates of Rs 50,000 crore—was really money
down the drain. More to the point, after the apex court’s strictures, the next
government will have to ask whether the additional piece of plastic in people’s
wallets can play any meaningful role in the future. In short, can Aadhar be
salvaged?

Much of the problem associated with the Aadhar
numbers stem from the constant shifting of goalposts. When it was first
conceived, the card set out to facilitate direct cash transfers to
beneficiaries of government schemes such as MNREGA, pensions, scholarships,
etc. The idea was laudable and was aimed at reducing corruption and ensuring
welfare benefits flowed to the beneficiaries in toto. Again, apart from the
fact that each individual would have a unique number and get their biometric
details registered to avoid duplication, it was a more evolved version of the
direct-to-bank transfers thought up the Rajasthan Government during Vasundhara
Raje’s first administration.

So what went wrong? To begin with, it must be stated
that identity cards often end up with multiple uses, often far removed from
their original purpose. A driving licence, for example, is a permission to
drive motor vehicles. In reality, it becomes a proof of identity and even
address, used for showing off to both bank managers and the CISF guards at
airports. A PAN card too does more than facilitate money transactions and tax
returns. It becomes a supporting document for passports, gas applications, et
al.

From day one, as an official document, Aadhar was
destined for multiple functions. The problem arose when its purpose was
extended from receiving government benefits to establishing identity and
permanent residence. In other words, what was a facilitating document for
eligible citizens became an instrument for establishing the right to be in
India and, by implication, citizenship. And this is precisely how it is being
increasingly used by non-citizens as an additional documentation, along with
ration cards and driving licences, to establish citizenship. Various sting operations
have clearly indicated that it takes as little as Rs 500 to get a permanent
Aadhar number for those not eligible to get it.

The point I am making is not unique. Throughout the
debate leading up to the mass-scale issuance of Aadhar cards, various bodies
including the Home Ministry and the Intelligence Bureau had stated their grave
doubts over the long-term security implications of the card. Those with an
interest in civil liberties had also pointed to the possibility that this data
could very easily be misused by a vindictive and intrusive state to invade the
privacy of an individual. Finally, a parliamentary committee on finance had
studied the scheme and pronounced it to be a bad idea.

The point is that what the Supreme Court pronounced
last week had been said by various authorities before. However, so profound was
the political backing for Nilekani that his hugely expensive application to
join the political class was rushed through, brushing aside all objections. A
scheme whose implications affected the very “idea” of Indian citizenship was
put into operation without the sanction of Parliament and without the cast iron
safeguards that were needed.

The reason for the rush was obvious: the Congress
leadership believed that Aadhar would redefine the rules of electoral
competition and establish it as a natural party of government for the near
future. Nilekani was in a rush to meet a deadline and hence the speed.

From all accounts Nilekani has achieved a target of
sorts—though even he is clueless as to how many “non-Indians” and illegal
migrants have acquired a card to establish a proof of permanent residency.
However, the Supreme Court has proved a party pooper.

Nilekani is a talented individual with a proven
record of corporate governance. Why did he rush into a venture knowing fully
well its pitfalls? My real complaint is not that Aadhar was flawed—some of the
best ideas need to be tweaked. The more important question is: what does it
tell us about Nilekani’s intellectual integrity? What does it tell us of a
political culture that involves spending public money to advance an individual
career?

Nilekani may or may not win the Lok Sabha election
but he cannot avoid being grilled for walking into a disaster zone with his
eyes wide open. “When a man of great intellect goes wrong”, Nirad Chaudhury
once wrote about Lord Curzon, “his intellect only makes his wrongness
incurable.”

About Me

The Right is an endangered community in India's English-language media. I happen to be one of the few to have retained a precarious toehold in the mainstream media. I intend this blog as a sounding board of ideas and concerns.
You can read the details of my education, professional experience and political inclinations on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swapan_Dasgupta).
RIGHT ANGLE is an archive of my published articles. USUAL SUSPECTS is my blog.